Dzogchen cosmogeny

[Blue Garuda]

Those who have completed the fourth vision experience the universe arising as the basis [snang srid gzhir bzhengs].

what is the "basis" of that experience? it can't be the same basis, as that would be circular.

Fascinating thread with a lot of words I don't fully understand, but the word 'origin', like 'primordial' which sometimes pops up (in terms of wisdom) could leave one with the impression that there is a defined 'beginning' to be found.

I've not seen any evidence yet of this 'beginning' so I'll stick with the continuum I observe all around me - and yes, that 'circular' concept makes more sense to me in terms of this thread. Phenomena do not have to arise from an ultimate origin, only from that which immediately precedes them.

That's my 'twopennorth' (two pennies' worth) from times when money was not formless or in the bardo.

[Malcolm]

Those who have completed the fourth vision experience the universe arising as the basis [snang srid gzhir bzhengs].

what is the "basis" of that experience? it can't be the same basis, as that would be circular.

It is the same basis since self-originated wisdom is unchanging.

[gad rgyangs]

Those who have completed the fourth vision experience the universe arising as the basis [snang srid gzhir bzhengs].

what is the "basis" of that experience? it can't be the same basis, as that would be circular.

It is the same basis since self-originated wisdom is unchanging.

im confused about where the samyak sambuddhas are during the basis-bardo.

[Malcolm]

im confused about where the samyak sambuddhas are during the basis-bardo.

Parinirvana without any remainder.

This is another place where Dzogchen doctrine differs from common Mahāyāna -- the goal in common Mahāyāna is a non-abiding nirvana.

The ultimate result of Dzogchen is an abiding nirvana.

Why? Because compassion is innate in the basis, and whenever sentient beings appear, so do Buddhas.

[gad rgyangs]

Parinirvana without any remainder.

This is another place where Dzogchen doctrine differs from common Mahāyāna -- the goal in common Mahāyāna is a non-abiding nirvana.

The ultimate result of Dzogchen is an abiding nirvana.

Why? Because compassion is innate in the basis, and whenever sentient beings appear, so do Buddhas.

but there are no sentient beings during the basis-bardo, so does that mean that there are no buddhas either? Do both Buddhas with traces and Buddhas without traces get absorbed into the basis during the basis-bardo?

Samyak Sambuddhas fully eliminate traces. Hence the "samyak". Dzogchen texts speak of them achieving parinirvana.

So are there Dzogchen Buddhas who wave bye bye to the Samyak Sambuddhas who enter into parinirvana without remainder? is it simply a choice which one you want to be, or is one considered a "higher" level of realization (I assume since we are talking Dzogchen view, the abiding-nirvana-Buddhas are higher)?

[Malcolm]

but there are no sentient beings during the basis-bardo, so does that mean that there are no buddhas either?

Correct.

Do both Buddhas with traces and Buddhas without traces get absorbed into the basis during the basis-bardo?

Again, all sentient beings acheive some species of awakening by the end of a given eon. Samyak Sambuddhas acheive buddhahood without remainder.

So are there Dzogchen Buddhas who wave bye bye to the Samyak Sambuddhas who enter into parinirvana without remainder? is it simply a choice which one you want to be, or is one considered a "higher" level of realization (I assume since we are talking Dzogchen view, the abiding-nirvana-Buddhas are higher)?

According to Dzogchen texts, Samyak sambuddhas Buddhas enter into parinirvana without remainder. Buddhahood without remainder is considered superior to or higher than Buddhahood with remainder. It is the highest form of Buddhahood, according to Dzogchen.

N

[asunthatneversets]

Fascinating thread with a lot of words I don't fully understand, but the word 'origin', like 'primordial' which sometimes pops up (in terms of wisdom) could leave one with the impression that there is a defined 'beginning' to be found.

I've not seen any evidence yet of this 'beginning' so I'll stick with the continuum I observe all around me - and yes, that 'circular' concept makes more sense to me in terms of this thread. Phenomena do not have to arise from an ultimate origin, only from that which immediately precedes them.

That's my 'twopennorth' (two pennies' worth) from times when money was not formless or in the bardo.

'Beginning' isn't the best word because it implies a starting point leading to something other than the beginning (like a middle or end point) and implies time... 'primordial' is better viewed as a fundamental timelessness... always-beginning.... ever-present... unborn.... though the basis is a point of origin (like a source) the notion of time doesn't apply, time only arises from non-recognition. Likewise viewing it as a 'source' only applies to apparent phenomena arising from non-recognition as well, in the true nature of the basis it is only in-and-of-itself prior-to and inclusive of any distinction.

This is how I've viewed it, however if this is incorrect Namdrol please strike me down (I use informative threads like these to hone and refine my view as well so abandoning wrong views is imperative!)

[Mr. G]

The basis is not dependently originated. It is self-originated.

The Blazing Lamp Tantra:

Within initial original purity
the nature is like so:
not made by anyone, intrinsically clear
the nature is already just so.

The basis is original purity. The Unwritten Tantra states:

“There is no object to investigate within the view of self-originated wisdom: nothing went before, nothing happens later, nothing is present now at all. Action does not exist. Traces do not exist. Ignorance does not exist. Mind does not exist. Prajñā does not exist. Samsara does not exist. Nirvana does not exist. Even vidyā itself does not exist i.e. nothing at all appears in wisdom. That arose from not grasping anything.”

However, Prasaga is an intellectual view. Dzogchen is not and that is the main difference between the two.

Hi Namdrol,

Am I inferring correctly that dependent origination from a Dzogchen POV is illusory?

How would a Dzogchenpa address the concern that the Basis does not accord with dependent origination?

How would a Dzogchenpa address the concern that the Basis has been reified?

[Malcolm]

Hi Namdrol,

Am I inferring correctly that dependent origination from a Dzogchen POV is illusory?

Dependent origination from the Buddha's point of view is illusory.

How would a Dzogchenpa address the concern that the Basis does not accord with dependent origination?

Lhun grub.

How would a Dzogchenpa address the concern that the Basis has been reified?

Ka dag

[Mr. G]

How would a Dzogchenpa address the concern that the Basis does not accord with dependent origination?

Lhun grub.

How would a Dzogchenpa address the concern that the Basis has been reified?

Ka dag

Thanks Namdrol. I will give this some thought.

[Malcolm]

Thanks Namdrol. I will give this some thought.

The definition of lhun grub is "not made by anyone". Lhun drub is dependent origination free of afflictive patterning, thus it is pure process and transformation.

[Mr. G]

Thanks Namdrol. I will give this some thought.

The definition of lhun grub is "not made by anyone". Lhun drub is dependent origination free of afflictive patterning, thus it is pure process and transformation.

Thanks Namdrol. I found some other posts you made that really brought it together for me:

First, one has to distinguish the general theory of dependent origination from the specific theory of dependent origination. The general theory, stated by the Buddha runs "where this exists, that exists, with the arising of that,this arose". The specific theory is the afflicted dependent origination of the tweleve nidanas. There is however also a non-afflicted dependent origination of the path. For the most part, Madhyamaka covers the principle general dependent originationi order to show that all dependent phenomena are empty. Since, according to Madhyamaka, there are no phenonomena that are not dependent, the emptiness of non-dependent phenomena is never an issue, like hair on a tortoise or the son of a barren woman, since there are no non-dependent phenomena at all.

Nagarjuna however does discuss the twelve nidanas, ignorance and so on, in chapter 28 of the MMK.

The basis in Dzogchen is completely free of affliction, it therefore is not something which ever participates in afflicted dependent origination. Unafflicted causality in Dzogchen is described as lhun grub, natural formation. However, since there is causality in the basis, it also must be empty since the manner in which the basis arises from the basis is described as "when this occurs, this arises" and so on. The only reasons why this can happen is because the basis is also completely empty and illusory. It is not something real or ultimate, or truly existent in a definitive sense. If it were, Dzogchen would be no different than Advaita, etc. If the basis were truly real, ulimate or existent, there could be no processess in the basis, Samantabhadra would have no opportunity to recognize his own state and wake up and we sentient beings would have never become deluded. So, even though we do not refer to the basis as dependently originated, natural formation can be understood to underlie dependent origination; in other words, whatever is dependently originated forms naturally. Lhun grub after all simply and only means "sus ma byas", not made by anyone.

Rigpa is not a phenomena, it is not a thing, per se. It is one's knowledge of the basis. Since it is never deluded, it never participates in affliction, therefore, it is excluded from afflicted dependent orgination. However, one can regard it as the beginning of unafflicted dependent origination, and one would not be wrong i.e. the nidanas of samsara begin with avidyā; the nidanas of nirvana begin with vidyā (rigpa).

N

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=5474&p=59562#p59562

Padmasambhava states:

"Though the trio of essence, nature and compassion exist in reality, they occur as cause, condition and result because of ignorance."

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=5474&p=59781#p59781

However, since it is naturally formed [lhun grub], it can appear as dependently originated phenomena, for example, the five lights being reified as the five elements, etc.

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6579&p=78333#p78333